Project flexibility and creativity: the moderating role of training utility

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to study project management performance measures by analyzing how training utility affects the relationships between mutual trust, social interaction and creativity as well as mutual trust, social interaction and flexibility in projects.

Design/methodology/approach

Using training utility and organizational support theory, eight hypotheses were developed. Responses from 279 project management professionals in the USA were collected. The hypotheses were then tested using partial least squares (PLS) and regression with the PROCESS macro approach.

Findings

The results suggests that the communication environment indeed has an important role in fostering creative and flexible project managers. Additionally, the study shows that organizations can actively improve the influence of the communication environment on project management creativity through training efforts. Interestingly, these findings may not hold for project manager flexibility.

Practical implications

In today's project management world, organizations need project managers who quickly adapt to changing project management scenarios. To do this, project managers need to be creative, generating new and novel ideas, as well as flexible when converting ideas into action. Organizations often possess large amounts of knowledge, and project managers rely on good communication practices to access this knowledge in response to the required changes in the project domain.

Originality/value

The study includes contributions to theory and empirical research in project management by analyzing the critical role training utility has on the firm communication environments and its outcomes. The study shows that organizations can take an active role by investing in resources to promote flexibility and creativity in projects.

Citation

Awe, O.A. and Church, E.M. (2021), "Project flexibility and creativity: the moderating role of training utility", Management Decision, Vol. 59 No. 9, pp. 2077-2100. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-02-2020-0226